On Jul 24, 10:23 pm, Base <basselh...@gmail.com> wrote: > "Why should we care what kind of Javascript ClojureScript generates, > as long as it's correct and performant? The whole point of the project > is to allow us to write Clojure rather than Javascript!" > > James, you do get this point, right? Just like GWT allows you to > program in Java to write JavaScript, and get the 'benefits' of not > having to actually write JS to develop web clients, ClojureScript > allows you to program in Clojure to write JavaScript that CloSure > likes. > > If you like programming in Clojure than you *should* appreciate this > point. If you don't, than it seems to me that you are just picking a > fight to pick a fight.
I'm certainly not just picking a fight, I'm honestly voicing a concern. I believe you still need to learn and know and understand and be mindful of gclojure to use clojurescript. Furthermore, gClosure is low level in what it offers, you'd have to roll your own for much of what you could reuse elsewhere, and google acknowledges this in its docs: "What is the relation between the Closure Library and other JavaScript libraries? Many JavaScript libraries emphasize the ability to easily add JavaScript effects and features with minimal development time. Google engineers use these third-party tools for precisely the reason that the libraries are powerful for rapid development. The Closure Library is designed for use in very large JavaScript applications. It has a rich API and provides tools for working with the browser at a lower level. It's not well suited for all tasks, but we think it provides a useful option for web developers." Outside of google the closure library hasn't had much uptake and it's not part of the burgeoning javascript scene. I just feel it's ironic that on the JVM the idea is that the best practices of java that are conducive to "very large" application development are considered too painful for everyday development and therefore the reason d'etre of clojure, but when it comes to javascript then it's the "very large" apps that we'll gear up for and put up with the consequent everyday pain. It's also ironic that with clojure on the JVM we'd think that things like transaction software memory are worthwhile compromises performance-wise, but towards javascript then a slavish obiedience to the google closure compiler - which predates JITed javascript VMs, and predates the closure library which was modeled with it in mind - is prioritized over the development experience or a burgeoning platform of libs. Anyhow, not wishing to be further misunderstood, I regret any miscommunication and offer everyone my kindest regards. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
